Did my workplace trick me into signing away my bonuses?

My contract renewal contained two options to choose from relating to what I wanted to do with bonuses above my base pay. These were technical terms and were incredibly ambiguous; it turned out that the option I chose meant I had agreed for my bonus to be gifted to the organisation I work for, which is reliant on government funding.

I am appalled that ambiguity and deception would be deployed to prise employees’ fair remuneration from them. It beggars belief that employees are asked in a binding contract whether they would help the organisation out financially, out of their own pocket, every pay cycle. Most of us are trying to numb the pain of rising cost-of-living pressures. Any thoughts about nefarious and deliberate contract obfuscations that lessen the wages of at-the-coalface workers? It seems morally, if not criminally, wrong.

I asked Dr Gabrielle Golding, a senior lecturer at the Adelaide Law School, about your question, and she told me that because you’ve signed the contract, you may find it difficult to challenge it. This is because of what’s known as the signature rule.

“Where an employee is unsure about the meaning or interpretation of clauses in their employment contract, they should seek independent legal advice before signing,” she says. “The reason for this recommendation is that if any employee signs a written employment contract, then they are taken to be bound by its terms, irrespective of whether they have properly read and understood them.”

There are exceptions to this rule, however. Several of them probably don’t apply in your case, but a couple may be worth considering. The first, Golding says, is “where the employee’s signature was induced by fraud or misrepresentation on the part of the employer”. The second is “where an employee alleges that they have been misled or deceived by their employer as to the terms of their employment”.

I should make it clear neither Golding nor I are suggesting your employer has been fraudulent, deceptive or misleading. But it sounds as if you feel this may be the case. If this remains true, Golding says you may want to consider seeking independent legal advice to discuss the ambiguity, as well as any other elements of the contract you’re worried about.

One thing to keep in mind, according to Golding, is that ambiguity in wording in one part of a contract can sometimes be resolved, or at least lessened, by the remainder of the contract clause.

“A court is unlikely to read down a clause in its entirety based on a slight ambiguity in a heading alone,” she told me.

What can you do now that you’ve signed the contract? Golding says you do have options.